Fragile Unity

At Shanksville Monument, Electoral Differences Are Muted, But Beneath The Surface, The Politics Are Passionate

November 02, 2004|By JANICE D'ARCY; Courant Staff Writer

SHANKSVILLE, Pa. — The first layer of mementos covering the temporary memorial here is dominated by red, white and blue. The dozens and dozens of American flags overwhelm all the notes, baseball caps and angel pins sent from every state in the country. The largest flags, hoisted on poles that refuse to sway in the beating wind, snap so loudly it's hard to hear much else.

Everyone here is patriotic. On Monday alone, they came from New York, California, Wisconsin and a town down the road to pay respects to the 40 passengers and crew of Flight 93. After those aboard fought back against their hijackers on Sept. 11, 2001, the jet crashed in this pretty, green field below the memorial, essentially launching the country's first blow in the later-named war on terror.

On the eve of Election Day, this memorial's gravel lot is one of the few gathering spots in the country where patriotic fervor seems to trump partisan fervor. Here, all glean a message from the dead that protecting America is paramount to personal or political preferences. That's the first impression.

But stay more than a few moments on this hill overlooking the American flag that marks the crash site and the cracks begin to appear.

Carl Sprock, one of the locals who volunteer as guides here, is a grandfather of 14 and Korean War veteran who, once asked, cannot restrain his passion about the vote he will cast in a matter of hours. He has left his Kerry hat at home out of respect, he said, but he knows that the country's future security will be better served by the Massachusetts senator. A visitor overhears him and she fixes him with a scowl.

A few feet away, another woman feels as passionately. She is sitting on the bench dedicated to her husband, the father of their two teenage daughters. He was one of the Flight 93 passengers.

``I'm voting for President Bush. I trust him to protect our country,'' said Sandy Felt, who regularly drives from her New Jersey home to the field where Edward Felt died. Her tone does not invite debate. ``I feel like we're being hunted,'' she said.

Both spend hours here, mulling the meaning of Flight 93's sacrifice. Both cite national security as their overriding concern. Both also see their own choice as patriotic and the other's as perilous.

It's not that the national unity solidified on Sept. 11 has dissolved. It's that two interpretations of American pride and protection have, after three years and much prodding, become estranged.

With the culmination of the campaign today after a protracted electioneering season that seized on the country's divisions, this election will be marked by consensus on what issue is most important. The single matter of national protection has galvanized voters like no presidential contest in 30 years. Analysts, pollsters, even casual observers repeat that voters' convictions are intrinsically linked to their perception of the U.S. response to Sept. 11.

On the one hand, today's votes will be an unacknowledged display of this national agreement. On the other, the last time the country agreed on terrorism response was on the first day, when the Flight 93 Americans doomed their own plane.

In an effort to put the national mood into historical context, the Pew Research Center this August analyzed national polling going back 30 years. The center found that national security is more prominent a concern now than in any election after the Vietnam War.

Just a few years ago, the polling showed much less cohesive results. In recent elections, the economy emerged slightly ahead of other domestic concerns such as education, health care and the environment.

It is not so surprising that Americans are now more concerned about self-preservation, since the country has not faced a notable adversary since the end of the Cold War. But the results are surprising for the fact that they show such clear agreement over this one concern at a time when the country is said to be so divided.

The two major candidates are exceedingly aware that a single issue is forcing most voters' hands today.

When Bush spoke last week in nearby Lancaster, he said, ``We have issues of great consequence. The first clear choice is the most important because it concerns the security of your family. All the progress on every other issue depends on the safety of our citizens.''

Elsewhere, Kerry has just as knowingly addressed the issue by harping on the latest snags in the Iraq War. ``The bottom line, Mr. President,'' he said in an October speech in Florida, ``your mismanagement of the war has in fact made Iraq and America less safe and less secure than they could have been and than they should have been today.''

What the candidates are both encouraging and exploiting is the different understanding that has developed in the electorate over the same issue.